• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick)


  • Subject: Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick)
  • From: Andrus Adamchik <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:34:05 -0400

Hi James,

Figured I'd add my $0.02...

Being at WWDC this year gave me a very good perspective why current WO stagnation doesn't hurt Apple at all, and is OK from their business viewpoint. Instead of trying to convert world to WO, Apple is doing the opposite - bringing the world to Mac OS X by bundling every single development tool known to man with the OS. At a risk of alienating a few thousands WebObjects developers (this sucks, but then WO is not going away, it is simply stagnating), Apple has a potential of bringing hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of UNIX and Java geeks to the Mac platform. And at a very little cost for that matter, as most of the integrated tools are open source. I personally don't want to develop in PHP, so I have my own objections, but it is hard to argue with such business strategy - it makes sense.

Considering the above I think the energy spent on urging Apple to change the course with WO, open source it, or market it, might as well be directed in helping existing open source projects (or starting new ones!) to bring the power of WO to the masses.

There is a lot of things that can be done - if you are not satisfied with WOBuilder, help Ulrich with WOLips; if you need D2JC outside of WO, help us bring it to Cayenne (we will do that anyway soon, but things can move much faster); need a rule-based interface engine ala D2W, lets start a new project integrating rules/Cayenne/Tapestry. And finally, if you want all of the above to be on the MacOS X CD, try make these things successful, and Apple will notice ;-).

A few more points...

Supporting existing open source projects as opposed to asking Apple to open source WO has another advantage - these projects have a proven survival record in the open source environment and have built a substantial vibrant community. You can't create a community by executive order.

Talking about grants, I think such (currently nonexistent) grants should rather be spent to support WOProject/WOLips/objectstyle.org. [What a self-serving idea, huh ;-)]. We could use a few bucks to cover the hosting expenses, hire a part time sysadmin, get away from broken SourceForge CVS, do some JUG presentations outside our home areas, etc. This will be *much* less than 1 mln/yr. and would make a real difference.

Cheers,
Andrus

------------------------------
Andrei (aka Andrus) Adamchik
Cayenne Object-Relational Framework
http://objectstyle.org/cayenne/


On Jul 10, 2004, at 9:19 PM, James Cicenia wrote:
Well it is nice to get back from my little vacation. I was actually looking forward
to some positive news from the developers conference. I was especially looking
forward to a WO 6.0 type announcement. Obviously, there was no WO 6.0 and
we all felt a bit slighted to say the least. I mean, can't Apple with 4 Billion in the
bank afford a small team of 5 individuals to work with Wonder, WOLips, etc., to
make the product sing? It is hard for me to imagine the downside risk here. A
million dollars a year is pocket change for Apple and the upside could be a real
enterprise door opener. Ok, say 1 million is too much for Apple to spend a year
on this fantastic product.... open source it then! This in-between strategy is the
absolute worst strategy. It leads to stagnation, alienation, and no enterprise
advantage to market. If Steve or someone at Apple could educate me as to this
strategy's cost/benefit I would love to hear it.


Anyway, the real problem with WebObjects is marketing. I think this is what we
agree on. Well, we could look upon this as an opportunity. If we all took the
time to give some of our talent and resources, maybe we could create a nice
WebObjects "associatoin". The charter would be to promote WebObjects. Hey,
maybe even Apple could seed us a grant or two to help jump start our campaigns.


The beautiful thing here is that our promotional efforts would also generate clients.

Strictly off the top of my head I envision an association which is responsible for
"open sourcing" frameworks, generating courseware and presentations, mass
mailings to our core constituents with a monthly newsletter, consolidated website and
monitoring of all geek sites and magazines. Strong communication with Apple would
then become easier too. We could even maybe run ads. I did say that Apple could
give us a grant or two. I would have to figure that if we did this for
one solid year we would make an impact.


I could go on, but then that would have to lead to a full blown marketing plan. Well
that is my two cents on the matter after my nice vacation.


Good to be back,
James Cicenia
_______________________________________________
webobjects-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick)
      • From: Markus Hitter <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick) (From: Bob McCormick <email@hidden>)
 >Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick) (From: Alexandra Milton <email@hidden>)
 >Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick) (From: Thomas <email@hidden>)
 >Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick) (From: James Cicenia <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick)
  • Next by Date: Re: Get past Axis logging problem
  • Previous by thread: Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick)
  • Next by thread: Re: A "Why WebObjects" Site / Initial Thoughts Please (Modified by Bob McCormick)
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread